Telling a lie with my second bid

[Liversidge]

[hv=pc=n&n=sak85hqt753dat5c6&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1hp2cp]133|200[/hv]

 

We play Acol and Weak No Trump. On this hand I can't see any rebid that does not mislead partner. My hearts are too weak to rebid, 2NT shows 15-16 points, and 2♠ is a reverse showing 16+ points. Is this one of those hands where I 'lie in a minor' and rebid 2♦? I have only come across that maxim when rebidding with a 4441 hand where my second bid suggests I have 5 cards in my first (minor) suit.

[manudude03]

It's not pretty, but the general advice when playing Acol or SAYC is to rebid 2H on this. You would like to have a 6th heart, but partner should be aware that you might be stuck for a rebid.

[P_Marlowe]

In most seq. when opener is rebidding his suit, he is choosing the default action,

and the default action does not promise anything.

 

With the actual hand, either go with the default bid, 2H, or bid 2D.

Responder should always correct to openers first suit, unless he has 2+ cards more

in openers 2nd suit, if 2D gets raised to 3D, you will have a 43 fit, the shortage

together with the 3 trumps, so this should also work out.

[1eyedjack]

The extent to which rebidding your first suit (in Acol) promises extras in that suit depends to some extent on the preceding auction, the two factors of prime relevance being (1) whether partner has forced you to bid and (2) how much bidding space has been consumed. If you have been forced to bid, you generally promise less when your rebid may be a courtesy to keep the auction live. If a lot of bidding space has been consumed, you generally promise less due to a dearth of alternatives that do not promise extra values.

 

Take the uncontested auction 1C-1D-2C

The 1D response is forcing (assuming not by a passed hand responder), but because so little bidding space has been consumed, the 2C rebid promises a 6 card suit. Not so much by dint of agreement but more by inference: You would prefer to rebid a 4 card suit other than Clubs if present, and you would prefer to open or rebid 1NT if balanced, including 5C332 shapes. That only leaves hands with a 6th Club that might want to rebid 2C.

 

By contrast, take the uncontested auction 1S-2H-2S

Here the only rebids by opener over 2H that do not show extras are 2S and 3H. (Again, in context of Acol with weak 1N). So all opening hands that do not have extras must be shoehorned into those to rebids. The 3H raise requires a Heart fit, so everything else goes into 2S, which includes hands with less than great Spades.

 

If the auction is one where pass by opener is an option, then to rebid the suit shows a more serious suit, such as

1H-1N-2H

[wank]

you're right that rebidding weak 5 card suits is unappetising, but it's not so bad as it appears. partner can't have 4 spades unless he's got enough to force to game. if partner has 6 clubs he'll probably rebid 3c. the only shape partner might have where you're in trouble is 3145, but you hope he'll bid 2nt over 2h. if partner has a minimum with this shape, he should have bid 1nt rather than 2c.

 

by the way, it sounds like you play minimum level rebids in NT as 15-16. that's pretty bad as it means you need to jump with 17. better to play the rebid as 15-17 and jumps as 18-19. when you get to a more advanced level, opposite a 2/1 you can start playing 2NT as all balanced hands 15+ (any 15+ opposite the 9+ required for a 2/1 equals game so you can conserve place).

[Liversidge]

by the way, it sounds like you play minimum level rebids in NT as 15-16. that's pretty bad as it means you need to jump with 17. better to play the rebid as 15-17 and jumps as 18-19.

 

Thanks - I have consulted my references and it seems that there are two camps on this one. The EBU Modern Acol system file says respond 1NT with 15-16. So does the NoFear site, and Michelle Brunner, and Andrew Robson. But Bernard Magee and Klinger both recommend 15-17 for that bid.

 

I have also noticed that there is a lot of heated debate among experts about whether you should ALWAYS open 1NT (playing the Weak No Trump) with a balanced 12-14 hand, even with five good cards in a major. Andrew Robson and Michelle Brunner are firmly in the 'always 1NT' camp. Magee says open 1NT unelss the five card major is of good quality, the EBU says always open the 5 card major unless it is of very poor quality.

 

I guess the only good thing a novice can draw from all this is that where there is a lot of debate among experts then it must be a pretty marginal call, so I shouldn't lose too much sleep over it until I get a lot better at Bridge.

[1eyedjack]

I think that some of the recommendations may have historical influences.

"Original" Acol was pretty consistent in advising 15-16 for the cheapest rebid in NT. A lot of books on the subject are still around from that era.

15-17 is a slightly more recent development, since say about 30 years ago (guessing).

 

The problem that teachers have is that regardless of their personal preferences, or the actual merits of the method, then unless there is something particularly heinous in the method there is a premium to teaching a method that is the most widely recognised as standard. Likewise, when teaching an "advanced" or "modern" acol, there is an incentive to build on, ie add to, basic Acol while disturbing as little as possible the foundations of basic Acol, so that the student does not have a lot of un-learning to do.

 

A related area, you will find, is the definition of the 2N rebid, uncontested after a 2/1 suit response to a 1-suit opener. In most printed material on Acol this will be shown as 15-16 points and non-forcing. In many modern methods the rebid shows 15-19/20 and is game forcing. The change is driven by the unwieldy 3N rebid that otherwise allows no room for investigation, combined with a low frequency that the hand belongs in the partscore. In order to shore up some of the potential weakness to this change there has been a tendency to increase (marginally) the minimum strength requirements for a 2/1 response, placing a bit of extra pressure on the 1N response.

[Liversidge]

In order to shore up some of the potential weakness to this change there has been a tendency to increase (marginally the minimum strength requirements for a 2/1 response, placing a bit of extra pressure on the 1N response.

 

Thought provoking, 1eyedJack.

There seems to be an area of uncertainty regarding responding in No Trumps with a balanced hand and 10 points. Some soruces say 1NT with 6-9 points and 2NT with 11 points, leaving the 10 point hand in a grey area, where you have to decide whether it should be downgraded or upgraded. Is this what you are referring to?

[1eyedjack]

There seems to be an area of uncertainty regarding responding in No Trumps with a balanced hand and 10 points. Some soruces say 1NT with 6-9 points and 2NT with 11 points, leaving the 10 point hand in a grey area, where you have to decide whether it should be downgraded or upgraded. Is this what you are referring to?

I suppose that there must be exceptions to every rule, but I would always make a 2/1 response with 10 HCP playing Acol weak. Opener will pass a 1N response with any balanced 15 count and nearly all 16.

 

 

 

[EricK]

I suppose that there must be exceptions to every rule, but I would always make a 2/1 response with 10 HCP playing Acol weak. Opener will pass a 1N response with any balanced 15 count and nearly all 16.

The 'rule' I suggest to a new partner who wants to play Acol is that you are strong enough for a 2/1 if you want to be in game opposite a strong NT. Almost any natural bidding system works much better if 1x 2y 2NT is forcing, otherwise responder is guessing on the second round, or opener has to take up extra room to jump to 3NT before responder has had a chance to describe his hand.

 

That's not to say that you should always bid a 2/1 if strong enough. If partner opened 1H and you had eg a 4135 hand and 10 points, you should respond 1S rather than 2C. This is because you are not strong enough to mention your Spades on the second round if partner shows up with a minimum hand, and you would lose the Spade fit if opener had a hand like in the OP.

[keithhus]

Hello everyone,

I am a beginner and was taught similarly - I.e. To bid a higher suit next time round would mean 16 points. However, my current partner (more experienced), tells me to bid up the line and to jump if I have 16 points. I am doing as I am told but feel we are going too high with this approach . Comments would be appreciated.

[manudude03]

Playing straight acol, a jump to 3D* would show extras since 2D doesn't cross the barrier (2 of your suit). However, 3S would be considered by most as a splinter bid (showing 4 card support for partner and at most 1 spade) since a 2S bid would cross the barrier.

 

* Those playing 2/1 will often play 3D as a splinter here too, but that would be one to discuss with partner.

[keithhus]

Playing straight acol, a jump to 3D* would show extras since 2D doesn't cross the barrier (2 of your suit). However, 3S would be considered by most as a splinter bid (showing 4 card support for partner and at most 1 spade) since a 2S bid would cross the barrier.

 

* Those playing 2/1 will often play 3D as a splinter here too, but that would be one to discuss with partner.

 

 

Thank you for your response. On the hand given I would be expected to bid 2S and jump with 16 points. I don't play splinters and don't know what they are yet, I will look up. My concern with our partnership's current system is that I could be at the 3 level without a suit agreement. May be it is just my inexperience.

[Liversidge]

On the hand given I would be expected to bid 2S and jump with 16 points.

I am a novice myself so am ready to be pulled up on this, but my understanding is that if opener's second bid is higher ranking than his first bid and at the next level up then it is a 'reverse' showing 16-19 points, whereas if responder's second suit is lower ranking than his first suit then he would have to make a jump bid in order to show similar strength. On this hand opener's first bid has set a barrier of 2♥, so a bid of 2♠ would overstate his strength, and if partner does not like either of opener's suits and is unbalanced he might well be at too high a level. Opener is limited to bids of 2♦ or 2♥.

 

Add 3 HCP to this hand and a rebid by opener of 3♠ would be an unnecessary jump, as the 2♠ reverse would do the job. For partnerships playing Splinters (most tournament players) 3♠ would carry a specific conventional meaning, showing at least game support in Clubs (5+ card Club support) and a singleton in Spades, with a possibility of a slam if partner's values are outside of Spades (I think!!!)

[akwoo]

Hello everyone,

I am a beginner and was taught similarly - I.e. To bid a higher suit next time round would mean 16 points. However, my current partner (more experienced), tells me to bid up the line and to jump if I have 16 points. I am doing as I am told but feel we are going too high with this approach . Comments would be appreciated.

 

This is a sign that your partner can't understand the difference between the sequences 1♥-2♣-2♠ and 1♠-2♣-2♥.

 

This is a serious problem for someone who is experienced. It means their bridge intelligence is seriously lacking. You should get a new partner as soon as possible.

[keithhus]

I am a novice myself so am ready to be pulled up on this, but my understanding is that if opener's second bid is higher ranking than his first bid and at the next level up then it is a 'reverse' showing 16-19 points, whereas if responder's second suit is lower ranking than his first suit then he would have to make a jump bid in order to show similar strength. On this hand opener's first bid has set a barrier of 2♥, so a bid of 2♠ would overstate his strength, and if partner does not like either of opener's suits and is unbalanced he might well be at too high a level. Opener is limited to bids of 2♦ or 2♥.

 

Add 3 HCP to this hand and a rebid by opener of 3♠ would be an unnecessary jump, as the 2♠ reverse would do the job. For partnerships playing Splinters (most tournament players) 3♠ would carry a specific conventional meaning, showing at least game support in Clubs (5+ card Club support) and a singleton in Spades, with a possibility of a slam if partner's values are outside of Spades (I think!!!)

 

 

Thank you. My understanding (1st para) is as you outline but it is not, unfortunately, as I am playing. In order to get around this, I was thinking of say opening the higher suit ( spades in your example), although I do appreciate this would be taken as 5/4 the wrong way round. I will continue to argue my preference! Thank once again.

[1eyedjack]

There is a reason why standard methods have stood the test of time, and why trying to solve the problems of poorly conceived non-standard methods by patching them with yet more non-standard follow-ups tends not to attract a noticeable following.

[Vampyr]

I am a novice myself so am ready to be pulled up on this, but my understanding is that if opener's second bid is higher ranking than his first bid and at the next level up then it is a 'reverse' showing 16-19 points,

 

A reverse does not usually show 16-19; it shows 16+ with no upper limit.

[keithhus]

There is a reason why standard methods have stood the test of time, and why trying to solve the problems of poorly conceived non-standard methods by patching them with yet more non-standard follow-ups tends not to attract a noticeable following.

 

I am not in disagreement, I was just musing how I could overcome a little local difficulty. Thanks

[keithhus]

This is a sign that your partner can't understand the difference between the sequences 1♥-2♣-2♠ and 1♠-2♣-2♥.

 

This is a serious problem for someone who is experienced. It means their bridge intelligence is seriously lacking. You should get a new partner as soon as possible.

 

 

You may say that, I couldn't possibly comment.

[wank]

Rebidding a new suit below 2 of opener's after a 2 level response, e.g. 1s-2c-2d is played as forcing (but requiring no extras) above perma-beginner level. As you can rebid in a forcing manner, you don't need to jump, so 3d can be used for something else, normally a splinter for clubs.

 

Rebidding in a higher ranking suit is indeed a reverse, showing 16+ (you shouldn't open at the 2 level just because you have 20 points, even if you are playing strongg 2s). Reversing opposite a 1 level response is forcing. Reversing opposite a 2 level response is forcing to game.

[Vampyr]

This is a sign that your partner can't understand the difference between the sequences 1♥-2♣-2♠ and 1♠-2♣-2♥.

 

This is a serious problem for someone who is experienced. It means their bridge intelligence is seriously lacking. You should get a new partner as soon as possible.

 

It may not be their bridge intelligence. A very prominent London teacher teaches beginners to reverse without extra values, or so I have heard. Presumably the idea is that after one too many times getting too high on a partscore the students will work out the principle on their own. With a little luck your partner may change his thinking after a few disasters.

[akwoo]

It may not be their bridge intelligence. A very prominent London teacher teaches beginners to reverse without extra values, or so I have heard. Presumably the idea is that after one too many times getting too high on a partscore the students will work out the principle on their own. With a little luck your partner may change his thinking after a few disasters.

 

For someone who is experienced, it means their bridge intelligence is lacking.

 

I would not say the same thing for someone who is not experienced.

[Vampyr]

Keithus has said that he is a beginner, and that partner is "more experienced". This does not mean that the partner is what would be thought of as an experienced player.

[Mbodell]

It also is worth being aware of that in a number of other systems, a second bid in a higher suit at the 2 level after partner makes a 2/1 bid does not show extra values. That doesn't effect what is right/normal in Acol (about which I know very little and would trust the thread) - but it does mean that someone (OP, the partner, the person who told the partner) might have been describing a different bidding system where that sort of auction is just shape showing. So that might have lead to some of the issue.